MacAluso v. Pleskin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that computerized images of x-rays were authenticated by testimony from the treating physician that the images \were a fair and accurate depiction of the x- rays he had taken\
• video animation of soft tissue injuries was testimonial in nature rather than a mere visual aid and “was not relevant to plaintiff’s precise medical condition and included speculation regarding the possible consequences of hypothetical injuries”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).